Can we PLEASE just nuke Israel

[a world of no]

gbk will always receive a jew

[hipster holocaust]

i wanna put my pud in her synagogue.

You fall into the not Jewish/rich enough/black enough category. Denied.

[Necrometer]

bmup

[FVBTVS]

[Introvert]

bmup

Is Ross drunk posting, or is he EddErik-ing? Miss you good sir!

[cxwx]

I don't remember the "Jofa's guardian angel" troll

[cxwx]

Can't find the Adolf Stalin channel anymore

[Necrometer]

https://m.youtube.com/c/AdolfStalin

that was his channel but it seems to be gone

[Eight Bit Alien]

FUCK. FUCK

[Eight Bit Alien]

That fucking SUCKS.

[cxwx]

https://twitter.com/i/flow/login?redire ... f_stalin88
https://payhip.com/AdolfStalin

[Eight Bit Alien]

His substack is so good

I wish I had this in 2005

As a socialist of sorts I think that only men should get welfare. Men aren't the ones who pump out the children and since women do, it will de-incentivize women from having kids out of wedlock and I see only good things coming out of it. That way it will help men be financially stable and able to provide for their women and since women won't get it unless they're in a relationship it will tie them to the man and make it impossible for them to leave and if they do leave, nature will take care of the rest and she'll starve and the kids would too (in the current system). In an ideal system, the kids would stay with the father and there would be only 1 casualty. If the system wants to reduce loss of life, they would have to ultimately side with the father out of concerns for the children. Men are less of a tax burden, too, in comparison to women because of the additional mouths that have to be fed with said tax dollars, this would ultimately kill two birds with one stone as people would foot the bill for a lesser amount of people and men could actually pay their bills and rent on time, and women would be forced to marry in droves because those protections aren't afforded to them.

[FVBTVS]

LOL

[pooptastik]

Dude. Yes. Bwhahahahaah….